refactor(interpreter): consistency in all_results_are_covered() #961
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
IaroslavMazur
had a problem deploying
to
ci-cachegrind
GitHub Actions
Failure
IaroslavMazur
force-pushed
the
iaro/consistency-in-a-test-function
branch
from
c57b65f
to
3c9874d
Compare
IaroslavMazur
had a problem deploying
to
ci-cachegrind
GitHub Actions
Failure
- export the return_error! macro to the crate level; - unite the 2 redundant match arms when initializing SuccessOrHalt from from InstructionResult;
IaroslavMazur
force-pushed
the
iaro/consistency-in-a-test-function
branch
from
3c9874d
to
fb486fc
Compare
IaroslavMazur
had a problem deploying
to
ci-cachegrind
GitHub Actions
Failure
rakita
approved these changes
Jan 10, 2024
Good to know, thank you for the insight! 🙏 |
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While any of the 2 could've been used to achieve consistency,
{ }has been chosen because, as far as I've read, it doesn't lead to any memory being allocated (being just a code block), while( ), representing the "unit type", does occupy some memory.The latter isn't as important in the context of a test function, of course, but given that this would be the better option (over
( )), in general, don't see why it wouldn't also be used throughout the test functions (to maintain the consistency with the production codebase functions).Curious about your take on this, @rakita